“Real Women” in Women’s Studies: A Reflexive Look at the Theory/Practice Dilemma

Introduction: The Theory/Practice Dilemma

In women's studies classrooms, a common theme of debate is the "theory/practice dilemma." This dilemma centers on the belief that there is a gap between the ideal and the real, perceived as a gap between what we do with our heads and what we do with our bodies, a gap between thought and action, and a gap between the solutions we envision to social problems and the challenges inherent in putting those envisioned solutions into practice. Exploring this perceived dilemma is not unique to women's studies classrooms; at least since Aristotle identified theoria as distinct from praxis, scholars have often approached theoretical learning as an abstraction of, and therefore at a distance from, everyday life. Though not every generation of feminist scholars has lamented a dilemma between theory and practice, it seems to be a currently popular topic, of a piece with "third wave" feminist concerns to redress the failures and weaknesses of feminist scholarship of earlier generations.

In my classroom experience, student discussion of this theory/practice dilemma often takes an explicitly political shape, centering on questions of the practical applicability of feminist theory, suggesting that those who write theory enjoy tremendous class privilege over those about whom it is written. bell hooks believes theory and practice are in fact inseparable, but their natural union "has been undermined by anti-intellectualism and by elitist academics who believe their 'ideas' need not have any connection to real life" (hooks, Feminist 112). Perhaps concerned about their own implication in these power relations and economies of knowledge production, women's studies students, in my experience, demonstrate a belief in the existence of, and interest in resolving, this dilemma between theory and practice.

Since 2003, I have taught over twenty women's studies courses at two U.S. universities: a large, public research university and a large, public teaching university. These include various courses in feminist theory, feminist cultural studies, feminist philosophy, and introductory women's studies. In all these classes at both universities, students have come to class already aware of the theory/practice dilemma. They may not always name it in quite that way, but they communicate tacit acceptance that the labor of theorizing is significantly different from the labor of practice. Therefore, in both my course content and pedagogical approach, I have encouraged students to explore this theory/practice dilemma. Through course readings, films, and group and individual assignments, I have instructed students to consider the relationships between experience and imagination, the concrete and the abstract, and the practical and the ideal.

But while I encourage them to discuss this perceived dilemma, I also encourage students to question whether it truly exists. I do this in order to push them beyond reproducing received ideas and toward developing their skills in reflexive thinking, or meta-thinking. Thus, my goal is not only to expose students to how the dilemma has been debated, but to help my students develop the skills to appreciate the very organization of debates themselves, to help them see that a dualist framework that structures this theory/practice dilemma is itself a product of a particular moment in the history of theorizing, itself situated in relations of economic, social, and cultural power.

When I suggest the theory/practice dilemma may not be "real," students insist that it is, and that it is as strong, vexing, and relevant as ever. There are many ways to interpret the relationship between theory and practice; in the case of my students, they understand it chiefly as concerning the accessibility and relevance of feminist theory. That is, students' engagement with the dilemma is expressed as concern over whether feminist studies is accessible or even relevant to what they call "the real world," a space they conjure as outside the classroom, and to whom they call "real women," assumed to exist in this non-academic space. In framing the dilemma in this way, students automatically conflate "theory" with the academy, its practices, and its inhabitants; and "practice" with the real world, its practices, and its inhabitants...